Dare I say a female might have the better chance of getting the jury on her side in a case like this?

Using 'better chance' implies one thing has a better chance than another. So there must be at least two subjects. So if it's 'someone' rather than a particular gender, who/what do they have a better chance than?

sanchia -> RE: Allegations of Jimmy Saville (3/5/2013 4:28:22 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phubbs

quote:

And to me, that reads as Phubbs jumping to the erroneous conclusion that the jury lacks the capacity to rationally process this case. And as someone who has served as juror, that pisses me off to no end. [sm=893banghead-thumb.gif]

A jury is just regular members of public, just average everyday working folk, could be a anyone, anyone can have their own views/ideas/issues/hang ups etc...about all manner of things which they bring with them. Plus in a case like this there probably is no clear cut hard evidence so its all about whose story is more believeable, who can make the jury side with them.

I have to actually agree here. I have heard some genuine horror stories about jurors (from people who work directly in that area) and the decisions they make, and it is true that in complex cases some are genuinely intellectually and emotionally incapable of coping. Sadly a lot see it as a burden rather than a civic duty and just want a verdict to get out of there. A jury is very much a Russian roulette situation and some are great with people who look at the evidence and make informed decisions, others are car crashes where they just utilise their opinion and what the person looks look to make a conclusion.

MonsterCat -> RE: Allegations of Jimmy Saville (3/5/2013 5:09:14 PM)

Jesus, Sanch, I fucking hate it when you make sensible posts. It doesn't align with my Phubbs is wrong argument. [:D]

It seems to be a case that no relatively famous figure from the 70's will not be arrested (although as I understand the Tarbuck one just allegations again and no charges at this time).

elab49 -> RE: Allegations of Jimmy Saville (7/5/2013 10:14:34 AM)

DO NOT speculate/link names of people to a paedophile/abuse investigation. That is libel, and the post will be immediately removed.

Phubbs, yours isn't the first post of this nature removed. Please use some common sense.

elab49 -> RE: Allegations of Jimmy Saville (7/5/2013 10:16:45 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: sanchia

It seems to be a case that no relatively famous figure from the 70's will not be arrested (although as I understand the Tarbuck one just allegations again and no charges at this time).

It's odd because like Hall and Roache this is being said to not be Yewtree - and the non-Yewtree stuff has tended to charge.

Perhaps they are hoping something similar to Hall will occur - the police have been clear that that case was finally made because his name was made public. He might have gotten away with his foul activities based on the original charges, but had to admit he was a what he was because of the other cases that then had the courage to come forward.

A prominent barrister specialising in reproductive rights has called for the age of consent to be lowered to 13. Barbara Hewson told online magazine Spiked that the move was necessary in the wake of the Savile scandal to end the "persecution of old men".

WTF? Yeah, because those poor old men are having such a hard time of it at the moment..... Speechless!

Wish I hadn't read that. So abusing a nine-year old girl is at worst "a misdemeanour"?

Gobsmackingly misguided.

elab49 -> RE: Allegations of Jimmy Saville (9/5/2013 11:15:11 AM)

It's the way she's putting over the idea that 'all' the likes of Hall did was an inappropriate touch which might make some people think 'well, yeah, I mean that isn't as extreme as rape or abuse, is it?'.

And then you remember the letter in The Independent from the girl he abused - because it wasn't the odd random touch he's been convicted of. So even those who've gone from the 'it's too long ago' argument and now want to try the 'but the odd kiss didn't harm anyone and isn't enough for a lynch mob' might want to pause and think a bit.

A prominent barrister specialising in reproductive rights has called for the age of consent to be lowered to 13. Barbara Hewson told online magazine Spiked that the move was necessary in the wake of the Savile scandal to end the "persecution of old men".

WTF? Yeah, because those poor old men are having such a hard time of it at the moment..... Speechless!

That is just mental. 16 year olds are barely bright enough to know what's right and wrong when it comes to sex, how the hell is a 13 year old going to be able to make these decisions? The creeps would have a field day.

A prominent barrister specialising in reproductive rights has called for the age of consent to be lowered to 13. Barbara Hewson told online magazine Spiked that the move was necessary in the wake of the Savile scandal to end the "persecution of old men".

What the actual fuck? How can someone even think like this? I'm stunned!

A prominent barrister specialising in reproductive rights has called for the age of consent to be lowered to 13. Barbara Hewson told online magazine Spiked that the move was necessary in the wake of the Savile scandal to end the "persecution of old men".

What the actual fuck? How can someone even think like this? I'm stunned!

A prominent barrister specialising in reproductive rights has called for the age of consent to be lowered to 13. Barbara Hewson told online magazine Spiked that the move was necessary in the wake of the Savile scandal to end the "persecution of old men".

WTF? Yeah, because those poor old men are having such a hard time of it at the moment..... Speechless!

WTF! [sm=893banghead-thumb.gif]

MonsterCat -> RE: Allegations of Jimmy Saville (9/5/2013 3:13:17 PM)

Oh, so acting like a creep and putting women in a horrible situation is just low level stuff? Well, that's good to kno... WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT, HEWSON, YOU UTTER TWAT!

Artoo -> RE: Allegations of Jimmy Saville (9/5/2013 4:30:59 PM)

The only people that come out with that sort of shit are people who likely get their kicks out of similar or related acts and can "relate"! If I were a friend of the Hewson's I 'd be keeping my kids away from her place I can tell ya!

Phubbs -> RE: Allegations of Jimmy Saville (9/5/2013 5:10:47 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

It's the way she's putting over the idea that 'all' the likes of Hall did was an inappropriate touch which might make some people think 'well, yeah, I mean that isn't as extreme as rape or abuse, is it?'.

And then you remember the letter in The Independent from the girl he abused - because it wasn't the odd random touch he's been convicted of. So even those who've gone from the 'it's too long ago' argument and now want to try the 'but the odd kiss didn't harm anyone and isn't enough for a lynch mob' might want to pause and think a bit.

Just a thought, this letter, how do we or anyone know its completely truthful? how can anyone prove that? it could easily be somewhat exaggerated no?.

Plus how do we know that at the time of these incidents the girl/s didn't possible encourage or maybe even enjoy what happened?? Maybe after the incident they realised what they had done and then decided they didn't like it?.

And on the 'its too long ago argument', again is it not possible that over the many many many years since the incident occurred that someones memories of the event could be somewhat faded and possibly exaggerated again?. Its perfectly normal for people to embellish the truth to make something sound better or worse. This is exactly how stories can get out of control over time because people may not remember everything clearly and add stuff on or make it up to fill in the gaps.

Rebenectomy -> RE: Allegations of Jimmy Saville (9/5/2013 5:45:17 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phubbs

Just a thought, this letter, how do we or anyone know its completely truthful? how can anyone prove that? it could easily be somewhat exaggerated no?.

Plus how do we know that at the time of these incidents the girl/s didn't possible encourage or maybe even enjoy what happened?? Maybe after the incident they realised what they had done and then decided they didn't like it?.

And on the 'its too long ago argument', again is it not possible that over the many many many years since the incident occurred that someones memories of the event could be somewhat faded and possibly exaggerated again?. Its perfectly normal for people to embellish the truth to make something sound better or worse. This is exactly how stories can get out of control over time because people may not remember everything clearly and add stuff on or make it up to fill in the gaps.

Christ you really are a piece of work, I really don't even know where to start in counter argument to something so vile as to imply that someone under the age of consent could have enjoyed/encouraged their sexual abuse. Hall pleaded guilty, bravo for him, but of course this gives us no reason to believe the words of his conceded victims, who lets face it, were probably gagging for it, or have embellished the issue because they're down right evil/nuts/female.

Plus how do we know that at the time of these incidents the girl/s didn't possible encourage or maybe even enjoy what happened?? Maybe after the incident they realised what they had done and then decided they didn't like it?.

This motherfucker has sexually abused young girls, one of which was 9 years old. Do you have even the slightest notion of how fucking terrifying that is for someone who couldn't possibly mentally process what's happening to her?

How the hell you haven't been banned for your blatant shit-stirring is beyond me. Go back to writing reviews nobody gives a shit about, you twat.

Just a thought, this letter, how do we or anyone know its completely truthful? how can anyone prove that? it could easily be somewhat exaggerated no?.

Plus how do we know that at the time of these incidents the girl/s didn't possible encourage or maybe even enjoy what happened?? Maybe after the incident they realised what they had done and then decided they didn't like it?.

And on the 'its too long ago argument', again is it not possible that over the many many many years since the incident occurred that someones memories of the event could be somewhat faded and possibly exaggerated again?. Its perfectly normal for people to embellish the truth to make something sound better or worse. This is exactly how stories can get out of control over time because people may not remember everything clearly and add stuff on or make it up to fill in the gaps.

Christ you really are a piece of work, I really don't even know where to start in counter argument to something so vile as to imply that someone under the age of consent could have enjoyed/encouraged their sexual abuse. Hall pleaded guilty, bravo for him, but of course this gives us no reason to believe the words of his conceded victims, who lets face it, were probably gagging for it, or have embellished the issue because they're down right evil/nuts/female.

Having had a module in the psychology of sexual abuse as part of my degree (quite a while ago I admit). This is the argument many paedophiles put forward as a reason for their abuse (not that I am suggesting that Phubbs is such just that he is utilising the same logic to excuse such actions). it is a case of attempting to sexualise children (as many of the victims were at the time of the alleged abuse) by essentially saying "they were asking for it". Also how can Phubbs who in the past has made posts complaining about the sexualisation of children then turn around and make a statement that individuals who were children at the time of such abuse may have been children acting in such a sexualised manner to excuse the abuse?

The important thing to remember is that especially in the case of Hall these were illegal acts with some who were children at the time with someone in a position of power using that position to influence and abuse children which was and is illegal. Other cases have alleged the same and in some cases allegations of outright force being used. Some cases may lack evidence, some may even be false but as long as they look at them and find those which are true and prosecute those who there is the evidence to prosecute than this is a good thing as these are not things victims just shake off (see the woman who after giving evidence on the abuse she received from her choir master many years ago committed suicide as a direct result of the torment she had suffered and the destruction of her life which started at that very point of abuse).

Phubbs, there is absolutely no doubt now that you are trolling because nobody in their right mind would say something so abhorrent. You may as well admit it.

superdan -> RE: Allegations of Jimmy Saville (9/5/2013 6:10:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phubbs

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

It's the way she's putting over the idea that 'all' the likes of Hall did was an inappropriate touch which might make some people think 'well, yeah, I mean that isn't as extreme as rape or abuse, is it?'.

And then you remember the letter in The Independent from the girl he abused - because it wasn't the odd random touch he's been convicted of. So even those who've gone from the 'it's too long ago' argument and now want to try the 'but the odd kiss didn't harm anyone and isn't enough for a lynch mob' might want to pause and think a bit.

Just a thought, this letter, how do we or anyone know its completely truthful? how can anyone prove that? it could easily be somewhat exaggerated no?.

I suppose it could, except that Hall has admitted to and will likely be found guilty of being a paedo. So that would likely indicate that the victim isn't lying at all and in fact recalls the events with horrifying clarity.

quote:

Plus how do we know that at the time of these incidents the girl/s didn't possible encourage or maybe even enjoy what happened?? Maybe after the incident they realised what they had done and then decided they didn't like it?.

This is one of the most sociopathic things I've ever read on here, or indeed the internet, ever. You are being an apologist for paedophilia and it's more than a little worrying to be honest.

And may I just add, for any Phubbs apologists, that prefacing a deliberately antagonistic post with "just a thought" does not defuse the situation. Nor does the predictable air of petulance that will inevitably follow when the trolling sod is called out. That and the pathetic bleating of "ooh, now they're ganging up on me!" Save it.

I genuinely hope that there aren't any Phubbs apologists after that one.

This thread is making my blood pressure rise on the last two pages alone.

Hood_Man -> RE: Allegations of Jimmy Saville (9/5/2013 8:59:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DancingClown

And may I just add, for any Phubbs apologists, that prefacing a deliberately antagonistic post with "just a thought" does not defuse the situation. Nor does the predictable air of petulance that will inevitably follow when the trolling sod is called out. That and the pathetic bleating of "ooh, now they're ganging up on me!" Save it.